This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2009/05/14/antitrust-violations-by-microsoft/.
Posted in Antitrust, GNU/Linux, Hardware, Law, Microsoft at 5:31 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft’s list of offences grows these days (from illegal deals to bundling and kickbacks)
NOW that Intel is severely fined for its crimes (not enough after damage had been done, as an embargo would prove more effective), Microsoft ought to be careful because it engages in similar practices, sometimes with Intel, e.g.:
=> Intel is severely fined for its crimes
Microsoft on Intel’s Anti-Linux: “Please Keep Confidential. This is a Nightmare”Microsoft Accused of Profiteering ($1.5 Billion) from Crime with IntelA Gradual Fall of W|Intel… Thanks to OLPC?A Federal Court Judge Might Force Microsoft to Pay Up Money It Hardly HasMicrosoft Accused of Profiteering ($1.5 Billion) from Crime with IntelWhat We Can Learn About Novell from Intel-Microsoft-Dell-Hewlett-Packard Collusions
Let’s look at articles and posts from the past couple of days to find new evidence of Microsoft breaking the law.
This is a subject that we covered in [1, 2]. It is not worth repeating the details, but here is another new article on the subject. It’s summarised as follows:
=> 1 | 2 | ↺ another new article on the subject
The Swiss Federal Office for Construction and Logistics (Bundesamt für Bauten und Logistik, or BBL) is reported as having purchased Microsoft licenses in the order of 42 million Swiss francs (about $38 million). Because no public bids were tendered, open source organizations are now requesting a review of the decision.
This too is a subject that we looked at last week. Opera and Mozilla are both complaining about Microsoft bundling [1, 2] and DaemonFC saw it for himself before he wrote:
=> 1 | 2 | ↺ saw it for himself
IE 8 is bad enough on it’s own merits, but Microsoft has sank pretty damned low in turning it into a borderline trojan horse/spyware/browser search hijacker.
A source says that ASUS has admitted receiving kickbacks from Microsoft to kick GNU/Linux and another source says that Microsoft sells Windows below cost in order to just harm competition (GNU/Linux). Intel committed similar offences and in addition to this, says one person, Microsoft’s hardware limitations are to be treated as an antitrust violation.
=> ASUS has admitted receiving kickbacks from Microsoft to kick GNU/Linux | another source says that Microsoft sells Windows below cost | ↺ says one person
Why Aren’t Hardware Limits on Netbooks an Anti-Trust Violation?Continuing on today’s theme of asking dumb questions about areas of law I don’t know enough about, here’s a question about anti-trust law, spurred by the news that Administration Plans to Strengthen Antitrust Rules.[...]Why isn’t this illegal? Don’t the anti-trust laws prevent a software maker with a dominant position from dictating hardware to pc makers in order to protect the market share of a different product?
Whether a violation or not, the consumer suffers here. █
“This anti-trust thing will blow over. We haven’t changed our business practices at all.”
–Bill Gates
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
=> Permalink | ↺ Send this to a friend
=> Techrights
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
text/gemini;lang=en-GBThis content has been proxied by September (ba2dc).